Dr.C.N.Ramachandran writes both in English and Kannada (language of Karnataka, India); and has published a number of critical works in English and Kannada. He is a member of Phi Kappa Phi; and has won the Karnataka Rajyotsava award for his critical works in Kannada.

Dr. S. Settar is a
historian with a difference; he is not only interested in reconstruction of the
past based on reliable evidence, but also in the common people like the
sculptors and scribes and artisans who are usually ignored. A bilingual writer, Settar shot into fame
with the publication of

Shangam
Tamilagam in Kannada,
in 2007; it has already seen nine reprints besides bagging the central Sahitya Akademi award for
scholarly works. The present work, Halagannada, is more ambitious than
the earlier one; it studies, for the first time, 2020 edicts andinscriptions in Kannada during the first
millennium, on the basis of which it throws new light on the evolution
of Kannada script & language, the
scribes, and social history of the
period. In this review, I shall confine
myself only to a few of the major findings of Setter, documented in this work.

i)Evolution of Kannada script and language:

a)After
the first period (3rd century B. C.--3rd century A. D.)
during

which the only official script was Brahmi and the language was Pali as evidenced by Ashokan
minor edicts, during the second period (3rd
century A. D. – 4th century A. D.),
while Brahmi script was continued, Sanskrit gradually replaced Pali. During and after the
fourth century, Brahmi and Sanskrit were
gradually replaced by early Kannada script and language. Sanskrit inscriptions on copper plates also began
to appear in this period, the Nagarjunakonda
inscription being the first Sanskrit inscription in the South.

b) the Tagarti
edict of 349 A. D. could be the
first Kannada edict, a

century
before the famous Halmidi edict of A.
D. 450.

c)Bilingual edicts/inscriptions
begin to appear during the 6th

century. While in a few the Kannada script was common for
both Sanskrit and Kannada (Tagare copper plate, 6th C),
in others, two scripts and two languages
were used in one edict (ex. Alampura edict,
713 A. D.; this edict is split into two
vertical parts; while the left part uses both Kannada script & language,
the right part uses Nagari script and
Sanskrit language). Similarly, there
were inscriptions in Kannada and Telugu (Kannada script) and inscriptions in
three languages in Kannada script (Kannada, Telugu & Tamil; Rameshwaram Copper plate, A. D.
803).

d)Contrary to the prevalent
opinion, Kannada borrowed ‘voiced-

aspirated consonants’ and nasals not from Sanskrit but from Prakrit.

e)Sanskrit-Kannada
influence was mutual. Just as
Sanskrit

influenced Kannada
Kannada also influenced Sanskrit script and morphology. ( Ex. use of now extinct shakata
refa and rala of old Kannada in
the two Talagunda edicts . In fact, according to Settar, the above two
letters are used in at least 30 Sanskrit edicts.) Also, Sanskrit morphology borrowed words like
‘naadu,’ ‘palli,’ ‘ooru,’ etc. from
Kannada.

II
Scribes: Scribes
(here, meaning those who carved on stone or on copper plates) were known by
different names such as twashta,
tattakaara, tattaara,Vishwakarma,
and such.

a) The first scribe known to us was Chapada, sent to Karnataka by

Ashoka, who
belonged to Gandhaara. There
were many other illustrious scribes like Jayasena, Sriramapunyavallabha, Vishwakarmacharya,
and such; and most of the scribes were non-Brahmins.

b) Contrary to the existing belief, Brahmins were
not the composers of the

‘edict-texts’ up to the 8th century. Till that period, the scribes were both writers of texts and carvers on stones and copper
plates.

III
Caste-relations: Brahmadeyas (land-gifts given to Brahmins) and devadeya (land-gifts given to temples) decreased considerably by the 8th century; and, in their
place, those who fought for the rulers or undertook public service like building tanks in villages began to be
honoured. Nolamba Pallavas didn’t care much for either the Vaidics and Sanskrit
or temple-culture.

The criterion of a great research work is the
amount of arguments and debates it provokes, and Settar’s work is no exception.
Some of the points raised in the Seminar (centred on this work) were: the very use of the term ‘halagannada’ and whether it denotes an established early form of Kannada or different versions of
Kannada prevalent in different parts of Karnataka; whether Sanskrit really lost
its prestige after the 9th century since literary histories tell us
otherwise; and such. Most importantly,
edicts and inscriptions have limited purposes; and the knowledge gained through
them has to be supplemented with other sources like oral & written
literature, discursive writings, and travelogues. Otherwise, we will reach such indefensible
conclusions like ‘ since terms such as ‘varna,’
and ‘Jaati’ (in the meaning of
caste) are not to be found in the edicts, there may
not have been Varnashrama hierarchy
in the first millennium’ (as Settar speculates in his Preface).

The only
way we can honour Settar’s seminal and pains-taking research is through
engaging ourselves in serious debates provoked by this work.